mcp-erid

audit_batch

Batch audit URLs to verify ad marking compliance and receive a results table for each URL.

Instructions

Пакетная проверка размещений: таблица результатов по каждому url. Тариф Pro (MCP_ERID_API_KEY).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "urls": "<urls>"
    },
    "name": "audit_batch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`urls`	Yes	Список URL размещений для пакетной проверки маркировки.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided. Description mentions tariff requirement (Pro, MCP_ERID_API_KEY) which is helpful, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like error handling, rate limits, or nature of output beyond 'table of results'.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with no waste. Key information (batch, table of results, tariff requirement) is front-loaded and presented efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple single-parameter input and existence of an output schema (not described), the description covers the basic purpose and tariff context but lacks details on result interpretation or expected output format.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%; the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides (list of placement URLs). It repeats the parameter purpose without extra context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'batch verification of placements' and 'table of results for each URL', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like audit_ad_page that handle single URLs. The tariff requirement adds context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use for batch verification but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., audit_ad_page for single URLs) or any exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server